Congestion charging

[Guest]

[Guest]

First off the mark with a statement of support for congestion charging is Maureen Child. In her role as Executive Member for Sustainability and Finance, Maureen is a Non-Executive Director of Transport Initiative Edinburgh (ties). She recommends that you first read the most recent update, which is available at:

http://porty.org.uk/pdf/ties.pdf

Maureen writes:

"I am wholly in favour of congestion charging and Edinburgh's Integrated Transport Initiative of which it is a key part. Without congestion charging in 2006, on current trends in traffic growth, our neighbourhood will become constantly like Brunstane Road is now at peak periods in just 20 years time. We will not be able to afford the public transport that will give us the best alternatives to the private car in Edinburgh. There will be no tram except one loop in North Edinburgh, no substantial bus service improvements and not enough cash to maintain our streets beyond current levels. Motorists only pay one quarter of the cost to society of their motoring - it's time we polluters began to pay just a little bit more for a better quality of life for everybody."

[Guest]

Hmm... I feel quite conflicted on this one. I am a car owner who works in the city centre so congestion charging directly affects me. But I already use public transport, despite having access to a parking space on Queen Street where I work.

I do this on the basis that travelling by bus is less stressful, and we are, in Portobello, blessed with an excellent bus service in the Number 26.

So congestion charging should be a good thing for me... Except that how much better can public transport get? Portobello Railway station has been bypassed... the tram line is coming nowhere near us... and there is limited scope for further bus lanes. And we are already served by a bus that runs every five minutes throughout the day.

So I think I'm probably inclined to vote against. I don't see any benefit for Portobello.

The environmental argument, of course, is another thing entirely. But a city-by-city congestion charge is not the way forward IMHO - it's a blunt instrument (like the poll tax) which penalises irrespective of the ability to pay.

[Surrealist]

[Brian McCrow]

[Surrealist]

[Guest]

[Guest]

[Guest]

Crisis? What crisis? I'm sure I still have that jacket somewhere, but I'm not sure about the silver boots.

[Guest]

Truth is I was never a biker, just a poseur. However, I have been giving some serious thought to an electric scooter. Easy to maintain, cheap to run, free to park, environmentally-friendly - what more could you ask for in personal transport? I haven't checked but I would hope that electrically powered vehicles would be exempt from congestion charging.

http://www.granbyscooters.co.uk/italvel_day.htm

[Surrealist]

[Guest]

With 45 votes in so far it's still neck and neck. We expected this one to go close, with plenty of strong feeling on either side, and so it is proving.

We still haven't heard anything from those who oppose the charge in the way of an alternative. Let's hear your proposals to solve the city's traffic problems.

More debate! More votes!

[Brian McCrow]

[Ned Ludd]

[bellybabe]

[Brian McCrow]

[Cynthia]

I was in favour of c charges, because I hate all the traffic on our roads, but have been persuaded against them - because they will particularly punish people who have to use their car either to get to work or for work (and therefore have to drive to work) and people who work shifts e.g. bus drivers, nurses, people who work in residential homes and finish work at 10pm or later, when its not so safe to travel or there aren't so many buses; people who have had to move out of Edinburgh to buy or rent a cheaper place to live, because of the v high cost of living here.

I have also been told that if public transport is improved people actually choose that as an alternative eg a lot of people choose to travel into Edinburgh from Porty by bus because the no 26 is fairly frequent.
One suggestion I have for taking traffic off the roads is simple but dramatic (and socialist ie in the common good) - renationalise the railways, & buses, thus making these non profit making (and unified ie not a whole lot of companies competing against each other or not joined up) and make it very cheap for freight to be transported by rail. If you want proof of the nos of huge lorries etc on our roads (big lorries/juggernauts = lots more pollution) stand by HL roundabout for ten minutes - an hour and you will see the huge vehicles regularly going around that roundabout - to Leith or on to the Bypass. These transport goods from cars to everything else. If we could reduce this type of traffic to a quarter of what it is (ie probably more local lorries picking stuff up from delivery points at railway stations or nearby to take to local shops) surely that would help a great deal.
Also if we made travel by bus just on one bus company that is run for the public good, all profits being reinvested into the service, and using DIRECT TAXATION of the very wealthy - taking income tax of the very rich up to the level it was under Thatcher - to subsidise improvements in rail and bus infrastructure, we could easily have a very fine public transport system, which people would choose in favour of traffic jams, parking charges, stress of driving etc.
There are lots of other arguments that have been made against congestion charges along these lines, and I can't remember them all. I don't drive altho get occasional lifts - and I don't like pollution, traffic accidents etc but I don't think Congestion Charges is the best way to raise money to invest in public services - or deter car drivers.
For instance, a bus driver for LRT told me he drove here from Fife because LRT is a better employer than some of the other bus companies - he is in favour of renationalising all public transport including making LRT a direct public service again and not having to compete with private bus companies. He would be punished by congestion charges.
A nurse working on quite a low wage, as most public sector staff are, having to use her or his car to get to work, often early in the morning or very late at night, will be punished by c charges (plus the exorbitant parking charges at the RIE including for staff). A lot of public sector workers live in Midlothian, W Lothian, Fife, small villages in E Lothian etc, because it is cheaper, and drive to work here. They will be punished by C Charges.
Everything is related - we have an overheated housing market particularly in Edinburgh with ridiculous prices - very rich people with too much money are investing their £££ in flats and houses to get a 'good return' and a better one than they can get on the stocks and shares market at the moment. But this is pushing house prices up to levels where people have to move away from Edinburgh to get a decent place to live. Someone suggested we should tax people higher who do this. I suggest we should just raise Income Tax over a certain (high) threshold up to the level that Thatcher taxed the v rich at (until she eventually put it down and TB has kept it down)....these people not only have far too much money but are inflating our house prices so people can't afford a roof over their head, move out of town and drive in to do essential jobs, often in public services. Yet wages don't go up in line with house prices (or even to match the increase in the C Tax)
So I think Congestion Charging is on balance a mistake. Its a short term fix that will actually be detrimental to lower paid people and it is an attempt to raise money for public transport through indirect taxation, particularly hurting lower paid/average waged people rather than raising money for public services through raising Income Tax on those who can afford to pay more to subsidise public services.

My suggestion: Renationalise rail and bus transport and increase direct taxation on the very wealthy (not sure what level this should be set at but at least on people earning £100,000 plus - possibly £50,000 plus - what do people think? and use this increased taxation to subsidise public transport, giving freight huge discounts on rail to take the big lorries off our roads...... Carla

[Guest]

[Cynthia]

[ceejam]

I think that Edinburgh Council needs to improve public transport before they introduce congestion charging. I know there is a park and ride just opened at Newcraighall and I assume there will be one at Edinburgh Park in time. The Lothian buses service is all well and good, but only reaches so far. There needs to be more, better interface points for people who are commuting from outwith the city bypass as it is not practical for everybody to use public transport all the time.

I personally don't take my car when going into town other than for work, but I quite often drive through town to avoid the bypass!
Where's the logic in that I hear you ask?
When I was at Heriot Watt Uni the quickest way to get there form Porty was along Princess Street, the West approach Road and out Calder Road, as the bypass is 4 miles further and moves at about 7MPH in rush hour!!

David Begg and subsequent council transport officers seem to have one aim: Edinburgh with no cars. Unfortunately they are too focussed on this, without providing alternatives which are as convenient.

Trams- What happens when the routes need to change?

Bus Park & Ride - Where are they? Bath has great, cheap, park & ride

Congestion charging - Is it to raise revenue or reduce traffic, surely if CC was effective, it would only raise a very small amount of cash, which may cover it's costs, but would not raise enough revenue to improve public transport. But then I guess that's why the car haters want to introduce it before providing alternative means.

Car drivers already pay tax than any other consumer group in this country, if everyone stopped using cars, the government would lose a huge amount of tax revenue, the same is true of smolers. The treasury don't want people to stop smoking or driving, or there'd be an even bigger deficit in public funding!

Speed Bumps - These are springing up all over the city, hindering emergency vehicles, increasing noise and pollution as cars slow and acelerate. Quite often the speed limit is still 30MPH, why not just reduce it to 20, because I know a lot of people will accelerate to 30 in between the bumps anyway! I know I could actually do more than 30 in between bumps to keep my average speed around tbne limit if I was so inclined,m but if the limit was 20 I'd be inclined to travel a lot slower.

Hope that all makes sense, a bit of a baptism of fire as my first post.

Cheers
Jamie

[administrator]

[administrator]